ÿWPCÄ xDªPh~±ú¸7‰Nf" ƒAÖϤ$™Ø)°ú4³d:ÌeÐpáR(Dë¢RÙ©„Àì2Ú i{¹0œ€e‘§;ÝŠ*«þÃKWV” N»ïé F1‘Œð¹ 1æ»Æu`óƒ#d%…Dú‘üñ3<‹/™mê8 üĉ‰ƒâJÇ™åP5Ô¾LHUnZz=»"¯Ø!µàð[ uÙ§ÚÿF¿D¶è¦ìOÌq–§ ²á˜& ñàöÏ5³?‰È:Iê²—Ž“s’µâTÛd¤Ué÷Hôz6üæ'J"¡ 3[:5æzpVÖ±§R¿—5•ô_pg Õ\d{Ïé}Ö'uíÊ‘Ù&ޒɉ™…÷Uõ7F,Â;_é ˆWVjŠk²¡§’rþÚu·œ‚ÎIåèMònÄH@ÝT;ÒW•~GÓà«‘#¥â|“ÌOÃ@zµœŒ=ô÷z)D[ àí$!]¯9BË¡}ÓÃxæ“a`¥­¬âö鼈>÷x‹ãUŽX/d'÷°H+G”£ëspß›[ðeî âé}PÁg¡y-Qh§”<'a„C•m>ìÂB×¼Üêô¸ JrÎ繪gúÍ}1Hú4öäÞ¹'| ì]’Ç©Úf#¼ÄSb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz N‘ Æ“ ÆY Æ Æå «N³³³Eµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµb···································· 0ë¿¿¿¿ Bªª 0¤Ç D5k D-  0KÍÍ ASÆk 0¤1 0DÕ A«˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»¬;-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularüPH,É ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 - ù-(|G2Æ7$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€PU»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô÷­ò»»Ô d(|3Ç~$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€PU»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Ç~$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€PU»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€PU»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼PU»»»ÔÑ8€‰XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îEdPUÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼PU»îîEd #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€17,€2002Ð üL ÐÔ‡X‰X»¼PUÔÌò òÔ#†¼PU»XX‰#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€JOE€E.€HUNTER€òòóóÔ‡X‰X»¼PUÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€2000„B„943€€€€€€Seth€Norman,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„01877„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€September€26,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓA€Davidson€Count€Criminal€Court€jury€convicted€the€defendant,€Joe€E.€Hunter,€of€the€Class€AÐ xÈ  Ðmisdemeanor€of€torturing€an€animal.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„202(a)(1)€(1997).€€On€appeal,Ð d´ Ðthe€defendant€claims€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction.€€We€disagree€andÐ P  Ðaffirm.Ð <Œ ÐÔ#†¼PU»XX‰”#ÔÔ‡X‰X»¼PUÔÓ¶ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼PU»àX‰e#ÔÔ‡X‰X.¼PUÔJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_ÔóóÐ ì< Ðand€òòAlan€E.€Glenn,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌGeorge€Thompson,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Joe€E.€Hunter.Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Jennifer€L.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ˆØ ÐVictor€S.€Johnson,€III,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Pamela€Anderson,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ tÄ ÐGeneral,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð `° ÐÓðÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼PU»XX‰#ÔÔ‡X‰X»¼PUÔÐ 8!ˆ  ÐòòóóÔ#†¼PU»XX‰Q #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X‰X»¼PUÔà  àÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€ð ðintentionally€or€knowingly€.€.€.€[Ô_Ôt]ortur[ingÔ_Ô]€.€.€.€anÐ #`" Ðanimal.ðð€òò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„202(a)(2)€(1997).€€€As€pertinent€to€the€conviction€offense,€Ð ü#L# Ðð ðððtortureðð€means€every€act€.€.€.€€whereby€òòunreasonableóó€physical€pain€.€.€.€is€caused.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„14„Ð è$8 $ Ð201(4)€(1997)€(emphasis€added).€€The€conviction€results€from€allegations€that€the€defendant€beat€aÐ Ô%$!% Ðdog€outside€his€Mercury€Court€apartment€on€November€4,€1999.€€€The€defendant€concedes€that€heÐ À&"& Ðstruck€the€dog€in€question€but€denies€that€any€pain€inflicted€was€unreasonable.€€€Thus,€the€defendantÐ ¬'ü"' Ðasserts€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€because€it€is€devoid€of€any€facts€that€demonstrate€theÐ ˜(è#( Ðinfliction€of€unreasonable€pain.€€Ð „)Ô$) ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€begin€by€reciting€familiar€rules€that€govern€our€review€of€a€claim€of€insufficientÐ \+¬&+ Ðevidence.€€It€is€well€established€that€a€jury€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€theÐ H,˜', Ðtestimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€state€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€state.€Ð 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_ÔòòState€v.€Hatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Townsendóó,€525€S.W.2d€842,€843Ð ° Ð(Tenn.€1975).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÐ œì Ðall€reasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571Ð ˆØ ÐS.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àMoreover,€a€verdict€against€the€defendant€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€andÐ L œ Ðraises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.€2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973);€òòAnglinòòóóÐ 8 ˆ Ðóóòòv.€Stateóó,€553€S.W.2d€616,€620€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€€The€defendant€has€the€burden€ofÐ $ t Ðovercoming€this€presumption.€€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€551€S.W.2d€329,€331€(Tenn.€1977).Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àMost€significantly,€when€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevantÐ è 8  Ðquestion€for€an€appellate€court€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÐ Ô$  Ðto€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crimeÐ À  Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn€R.€App.€P.€13;€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.Ct.€2781,Ð ¬ü  Ð2782€(1979);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó,€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405€(Tenn.€1983).€€This€rule€applies€to€findingsÐ ˜è  Ðbased€on€both€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838,€842€(Tenn.Ð „Ô  ÐCrim.€App.€1988).€€Circumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€to€convict€one€of€a€crime.€€òòStateÐ pÀ Ðv.€Bolingóó,€840€S.W.2d€944,€947€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€the€evidence€showed€that€the€defendant€livedÐ 4„ Ðin€apartment€186€at€Mercury€Court.€€His€apartment€door€was€apparently€accessed€by€a€commonÐ  p Ðentrance€to€a€grouping€of€apartments€184€through€187.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€days€preceding€November€4,€1999,€Mercury€Court€residents€had€€seen€a€smallÐ ä4 Ðblack€dog€lingering€about€the€premises.€€€An€employee€of€the€apartment€complex€testified€that€theÐ Ð  Ðdog€stayed€outside€the€passageway€to€apartments€184€through€187€and€that€if€the€employee€tried€toÐ ¼  Ðgo€toward€the€passageway,€the€dog€would€ð ðsnapðð€at€him;€however,€the€employee€was€not€afraid€ofÐ ¨ø Ðthe€dog€and€had€chased€him€away€three€times.€€The€employee€believed€that,€despite€a€no„pets€policyÐ ”ä Ðat€Mercury€Court,€one€of€the€residents€of€the€apartments€accessed€by€the€passageway€was€feedingÐ €Ð Ðthe€dog.€€€A€resident€also€testified€that€the€dog€had€snarled€at€him.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àAround€midday€on€November€4,€1999,€two€of€the€residents€heard€a€dog€yelping.€€OneÐ D!” Ðof€them€opined€that€a€dog€was€ð ðcrying€like€someone€was€trying€to€kill€it,ðð€and€the€other€witnessÐ 0"€  Ðtestified€that€she€heard€a€dog€yelping€ð ðlike€he€was€in€pain.ðð€€€Both€witnesses€looked€out€to€see€theÐ #l! Ðdefendant€striking€the€black€dog€with€a€stick€or€rod,€described€by€one€witness€as€a€metal€rod€aboutÐ $X" Ðtwo€and€one„half€feet€long.€€€The€dog€was€lying€in€an€elevated€flower€bed.€€€One€witness€testifiedÐ ô$D # Ðthat,€after€hearing€the€initial€yelps,€he€observed€the€defendant€hitting€the€prone,€motionless€dog€atÐ à%0!$ Ðleast€six€times€with€a€ð ðgolf€swing„type€motion.ðð€€The€other€witness€opined€that€she€saw€the€defendantÐ Ì&"% Ðstrike€the€dog€about€twenty€times.€€Neither€witness€observed€the€prelude€to€the€yelping.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àA€resident€called€the€police€to€report€cruelty€to€an€animal.€€Ultimately,€animal€controlÐ )à$( Ðofficers€arrived€and€found€the€dog,€still€in€the€flower€bed,€trembling,€ð ðobviously€in€pain.ðð€€It€did€notÐ |*Ì%) Ðtry€to€bite€the€officers€and€showed€no€sign€of€aggression.€€The€officers€took€the€dog€to€the€MetroÐ h+¸&* ÐAnimal€Services€facility.€€There,€it€was€examined€and€treated€by€a€veterinarian,€who€found€that€theÐ ° Ð30„pound,€six„month„old€dog€had€recent€bruising€caused€by€blunt€force€trauma.€€Although€the€dogÐ œì Ðhad€no€broken€bones,€punctured€skin,€or€permanent€injuries,€the€veterinarian€concluded€that€it€ð ðwasÐ ˆØ Ðextremely€painful€over€its€back€lumbar€areaðð€and€its€abdomen€was€ð ðvery€guarded,€very€painful.ðð€Ð tÄ ÐWhen€she€raised€the€dogððs€tail,€it€would€ð ðcry€out€in€pain.ðð€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àShe€treated€the€dog€for€the€pain€and€retained€it€in€the€facility,€pending€adoption.€€TheÐ 8 ˆ Ðdog€stayed€in€the€facility€for€about€a€year€before€being€adopted.€€During€this€time,€the€dog€did€notÐ $ t Ðbite€anyone€and€did€not€behave€aggressively.€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€testified€that,€when€he€came€home€on€the€morning€of€November€4,Ð è 8  Ð1999,€the€dog€was€sitting€in€the€passageway€to€his€apartment.€€When€the€defendant€reached€for€theÐ Ô$  Ðdoor,€the€dog€ð ðstarted€snapping.ðð€€The€defendant€threw€a€rock€at€the€dog€and€chased€it€away.€€LaterÐ À  Ðin€the€day,€and€after€having€a€few€beers,€the€defendant€attempted€to€leave€his€apartment€when€heÐ ¬ü  Ðencountered€the€dog€blocking€the€doorway.€€Being€ð ðafraid€[he]€was€going€to€be€attacked,ðð€the€six„Ð ˜è  Ðfoot,€two„inch€tall,€210„pound€defendant€retrieved€a€ð ðbilly€clubðð€from€his€apartment.€€He€ð ðtappedððÐ „Ô  Ðthe€dog€three€times€on€the€tail,€and€the€dog€went€to€the€flower€bed,€where€the€defendant€ð ðtappedðð€himÐ pÀ Ðthree€more€times.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àHe€testified€he€was€not€trying€to€hurt€the€dog€and€was€not€angry;€however,€on€cross„Ð 4„ Ðexamination,€he€admitted€that€he€ð ð[e]videntlyðð€was€angry€about€one€of€his€neighbors€violating€theÐ  p Ðno„pets€policy€by€feeding€the€dog.€€He€claimed€that€the€residents€and€apartment€manager€had€aÐ  \ Ðgrudge€against€the€defendant€because€the€defendant€was€a€ð ðloner€individual.ðð€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendantððs€claims€of€self„defense€notwithstanding,€we€conclude€that€theÐ Ð  Ðevidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction.€€The€state€clearly€showed€that€the€defendant€inflictedÐ ¼  Ðpain€on€the€dog,€and€we€hold€that€the€evidence€showed€that€the€defendant€did€so€unreasonably.€€WeÐ ¨ø Ðrealize€that€the€defendant€offered€the€only€proof€about€why€he€began€striking€the€dog.€€No€otherÐ ”ä Ðwitness€observed€the€beginning€of€the€episode.€Nevertheless,€even€if€the€jury€accredited€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendantððs€self„defense€testimony,€which€it€was€certainly€free€not€to€do,€the€affirmative€evidenceÐ l¼ Ðshowed€that€the€defendant€continued€to€beat€the€dog€after€it€moved€away€from€the€door€to€a€locationÐ X ¨ Ðthat€would€accommodate€the€defendantððs€leaving€his€apartment.€€The€defendant,€who€may€have€beenÐ D!” Ðangry€about€the€dogððs€presence,€struck€multiple,€ð ðgolf€swing„typeðð€blows€after€the€dog€lay€prone€andÐ 0"€  Ðmotionless.€€The€jury€could€reasonably€have€found€that€this€activity€equated€to€the€infliction€ofÐ #l! Ðð ðunreasonable€physical€pain.ððÐ $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_____________________________________Ð )à$( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌ